Saturday, October 17, 2015

I couldn’t let the week of “Columbus Day Sales” pass without acknowledging the genesis of this now contentious holiday. Why has Columbus Day become so controversial? Why has this intrepid adventurer come to be considered a villain rather than a hero?

In order to understand you need to be able to answer one question: what is worse than white privilege in America? Answer: the man responsible for bringing white privilege to America.

Generally credit for coining the term “white privilege” goes toPeggy McIntosh, a professor of Women’s Studies at Wellesley – a rarified position, if ever there was one – back in the 80’s. Since then it has caught on like wildfire in every bastion of progressivism in the land. Especially the White House – culminating in this year’s most dubious proclamationof honor by el Presidente:

Though these early travels expanded the realm of European exploration, to many they also marked a time that forever changed the world for the indigenous peoples of North America. Previously unseen disease, devastation, and violence were introduced to their lives -- and as we pay tribute to the ways in which Columbus pursued ambitious goals -- we also recognize the suffering inflicted upon Native Americans and we recommit to strengthening tribal sovereignty and maintaining our strong ties.

As pointed out in the Washington Examiner: “The “inclusion of such remarks wasn't always so apparent in Obama's first term.” indeed, in 2010 there was no mention of American Indians at all and in 2012 (election year) there was no mention of “violence, disease deprivation or devastation.”

Butt from 2013 forward the rhetoric has become increasingly harsh and critical of the “white privilege” brought to America by the old, dead, Italian white guy. The Sultan Knish (Daniel Greenfield) explains why this is “all according to plan” (double h/t Lantern) in The End of Columbus Day is the End of America (exerts; as they say, read the whole thing):

The explorer who discovered America has become controversial because the very idea of America has become controversial…

The discovery of America has come to be seen as somehow shameful and worst of all, politically incorrect…

It is about whether America really has any right to exist at all. Is there any argument against celebrating Columbus Day, that cannot similarly be applied to the Fourth of July?…

If Columbus is to be stricken from the history books in favor of ideological thugs like Malcolm X or Caesar Chavez, then America must soon follow. Columbus' crime is that he enabled European settlement of the continent…

It is easier to hack away at a nation's history by beginning with the lower branches. Columbus is an easier target than America itself, though La Raza considers both colonialist vermin. Americans are less likely to protest over the banishment of Columbus to the politically correct Gulag than over the banishing America itself, which was named after another one of those colonialist explorers, Amerigo Vespucci. First they came for Columbus Day and then for the Fourth of July…

A nation's mythology, its paragons and heroes, its founding legends and great deeds, are its soul. To replace them with another culture's perspective on its history is to kill that soul.

Butt don’t despair; there is a simple fix to all of this. All we have to do is concede that Turkish President Erdogan’s claim that America was discovered first by Muslims is correct and everything will be cool again! We can drop our antipathy for the old Genoan and focus all our disdain and hatred on the “death to America” cult.

In closing I mention once again that whatever social engineering claptrap is allowed to enter the classroom in one generation will emerge as mainstream dogma in the next. So remember, in addition to asking “who watches the watchers” we should also be asking “who teaches the teachers.”

Friday, October 16, 2015

I think CNBC just got trumped. The Donald is such a good negotiator that sometimes when he’s negotiating, you don’t even know it.

So when Trump said he was going to boycott the CNBC debate because they reneged (can I still say that?) on the original terms of the televised event, he didn’t stop there. He got the campaign of the other leading candidate to join him:

Dr. Ben is a quick learner

Donald Trump and Ben Carson are threatening to skip the next Republican presidential debate unless the format is changed.

The campaigns sent a joint letter Thursday afternoon to CNBC's Washington bureau warning they wouldn't participate in the network’s debate on Oct. 28 in Boulder, Colo., unless it lasts no longer than two hours and includes both opening and closing statements by the candidates. The Hill

The Donald pointed out that CNBC had increased the time in order to increase their commercial revenue (which reportedly went from $200k per 30 seconds to $250k with the addition of a third hour), not to provide a better forum for the candidates and and voters. Without coming right out and saying so he implied that without the 2 front horses in the race they didn’t really have much of a game.

Moral of the story: never, ever, bet against the Clinton machine. With the Clinton machine running efficiently in the background things that might normally matter no longer do. Corruption doesn’t matter, emails don’t matter, dead ambassadors don’t matter, classified information doesn’t matter, mucked up foreign relations don’t matter. In the Clinton Kamp of the Saints the only thing that matters are your female parts, free college and MORE SUGAR! For everyone.

No word yet on who will be picking up the tab for all that free stuff. Butt if you’re one of the remaining shlubs still working, assume it’s you.

Because Hilz is sick and tired of talking about her emails, and she wants to get on with doing the work of the American people.

Butt I guess that format is considered a micro-aggression in Democrat debates, as it’s based on a debate structure invented by old white imperialists. (note: this rule does not apply to Republican debates, as they are all old white imperialists)

Will the candidates be asked if they concur with Barry’s skepticism of his own Syrian strategy from the get-go?

Steve Kroft:You have been talking about the moderate opposition in Syria. It seems very hard to identify. And you talked about the frustrations of trying to find some and train them. You got a half a billion dollars from Congress to train and equip 5,000, and at the end, according to the commander CENTCOM, you got 50 people, most of whom are dead or deserted. He said four or five left?

President Barack Obama:Steve, this is why I've been skeptical from the get go about the notion that we were going to effectively create this proxy army inside of Syria.

Huh?

Will they be asked if they concur with Barry’s belief that America’s role in Syria is to “try different things”?

Steve Kroft: If you were skeptical of the program to find and identify, train and equip moderate Syrians, why did you go through the program?

President Barack Obama:Well, because part of what we have to do here, Steve, is to try different things. Because we also have partners on the ground that are invested and interested in seeing some sort of resolution to this problem.

It looks like Putin might have devised a way to resolve “this problem.”

Will Hillary be asked to reconcile her former positions on the Iraq war, drivers licenses for illegals, the 2nd Amendment, same sex marriage and the use of private email servers with her current (whatever they are tonight) positions on all of the above?

Willcrazy Uncle Joe set aside his grief in order to fulfill his dying son’s last wish? Or will he wait till after the debate in order to avoid all of those pesky questions?

St. Joe, saying his prayers: “I hope she fails. Amen.”

I’ll be making a big bowl of popcorn to enjoy while watching this matchup of the brainiacs.

Monday, October 12, 2015

I have a very hectic week ahead, so I’m going to have to leave you (mostly) to your own devices. Don’t do anything I wouldn’t do. Here’s today’s assignment:Big Guy’s interview on 60 Minutes – is delusion the new leadership?

President Barack Obama: “America is a safer place.”

Making America safer since 2009

Steve Kroft: A year ago when we did this interview, there was some saber-rattling between the United States and Russia on the Ukrainian border. Now it’s also going on in Syria. You said a year ago that the United States– America leads. We’re the indispensible nation. Mr. Putin seems to be challenging that leadership.

President Barack Obama: Well Steve, I got to tell you, if you think that running your economy into the ground and having to send troops in in order to prop up your only ally is leadership, then we’ve got a different definition of leadership. My definition of leadership would be leading on climate change, an international accord that potentially we’ll get in Paris.

Finally: a challenge that we can effectively lead from behind on.

President Barack Obama: My definition of leadership is mobilizing the entire world community to make sure that Iran doesn’t get a nuclear weapon.